»The Lord of the Rings Movies vs. the Book«
|
|||
 I just finished watching (for the umpteenth time; lost count, really) The Return of the King on DVD... I talked to my cousin today, who is reading the book for the first time. He has seen the FotR movie quite a few times, and TTT movie a small number of times, and is waiting to see the RotK film until he's finished with the book. Now, I've read the book once every year since the first time I read it. Granted, it was only a few years ago... But, since then, I have read it, The Silmarillion, the History of Middle-earth series, Unfinished Tales, the Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien (some) and as much else as I can -- my avatar name is a translation of my given name into Quenya, and I have gotten into a bit of linguistic study of Elvish, so, for a relative 'newbie' to Middle-earth, I am definitely well-versed. My cousin is in chapter 7, I believe, in Tom Bombadil's house, and he was telling me this afternoon how he saw the differences between the film and the book... I told him that I never really got the point of Bombadil (I know, sacrilege, right?) and that he was absolutely useless in a filmic setting... There's no plot development, and the tiny bit of Ring stuff there is in those scenes is already handled sufficiently in Bree, if not better. In terms of film plot and action, Bombadil would bring the movie to a standstill. So I understood the filmmakers' decision to leave him out. Now, there are some other things I disagreed with at first; such as Arwen's expanded role in FotR, and Faramir's character in TTT. But the more I see the films, the more I realize that in the medium of film, these changes were necessary. I am wondering how many other fans there are out there who agree or disagree with me. I believe that the book is the greatest work of purposeful fiction ever told; and, that the movies by Peter Jackson et al. are the best translation to film that we fans could have hoped for, and should be acknowledged as works of art in themselves, equal to the original work by a man who really had no idea how to write a novel (he was a linguist, not a novelist, after all). I told my cousin that even after seeing RotK, knowing how the book ends, that the climactic ending had me at the edge of my seat. I knew what had to happen, and yet, I still felt emotionally involved with the film. There is a guy who made some points about how techcentralstation.com... I posted a www2.techcentralstation.com... on the same site. (see 'Absolutely ridiculous' by Matthew) ...Have a read, if you like (and I hope you'll ignore the typos). 
posted by annaerullo |
|||
|
|||
| in-my-opinion.orgEntertainment & SportsEntertainment & Art (Assorted topics)The Lord of the Rings Movies vs. the Book |
|
|||
 Wow,  anaerullo aka mathew: An animated or CG version could come close, but would never surpass the beauty of the Kiwi vistas. Nah, here I disagree with you. CG will rule. Doug Kern: 'Every fanboy who watched LOTR is privately convinced that he could do a better job directing. One day, one of those fanboys will be in a position to do so.' Everybody is free to complain, but unless mis-directing is obvious they have to proove it. Talking is cheap. PS: Hey annaerullo, they show your email there. Sucks! 
posted by knn |
|||
|
|
|||
|
|||
 ...it was obvious that the shear logistics of bringing the books to screen in anything that resembles decent viewing time was a mammoth task. Getting an audience to sit still for well over two hours is hard work so kudos to Jackson for pulling it off with such gutso. I suppose if you really tried you could strip back all the 'resting' and 'bonding' of the fellowship and make this film in three hours but it would be a travesty of Tolkien's work I like the fact they used a setting so much resembling Middle earth and not fall down the Starwars route and blue screen absolutely everything. This is a fantasy adventure and we see spectacular visions of Tolkiens world but also we see the simple things like walking through a field with sun or rain on their backs, it grounds the characters into a world that starts to feel real to us. I feel Jackson created a monster that will almost be a millstone round his neck, people will never let him live up to these films untill he produces a masterpiece of some sort, then we'll let him off. As it stands he is being compaired to Lucas in that he can produce the vision, but cant produce the characters, which i feel is wrong, the characters in the films were excellent and you feel everything they go through, just like the books really  posted by Crossfade |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
 I liked the Films in this order (favourite at the top) The Lord of the Rings - Fellowship of the Ring LotR - The Two Towers LotR - Return of the King My favourite book was TTT, so I was expecting it to be an awesome movie, I was strongly disappointed with the whole Faramir scene, bored me to tears. Also, the battle scenes involve too much panning over the battle field, see BraveHeart for awesome battle scenes (also a better movie.) I agree it was a great feat for Jackson to pull off, but I'm not gonna like it just cus he made it an ok film. The Third one just disappointed me soo much, and I loved the books which I read at a bloody young age. I guess I can't share your obvious obsession with it, Annaerullo, but I still hold the books in great respect. I think because Tolkien was a Linguist that he wrote it so well. posted by hungarian kid |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
 hungarian kid: I liked the Films in this order (favourite at the top)
The Lord of the Rings - Fellowship of the Ring LotR - The Two Towers LotR - Return of the King My favourite book was TTT, so I was expecting it to be an awesome movie, I was strongly disappointed with the whole Faramir scene, bored me to tears. Also, the battle scenes involve too much panning over the battle field, see BraveHeart for awesome battle scenes (also a better movie.) I agree it was a great feat for Jackson to pull off, but I'm not gonna like it just cus he made it an ok film. The Third one just disappointed me soo much, and I loved the books which I read at a bloody young age. I guess I can't share your obvious obsession with it, Annaerullo, but I still hold the books in great respect. I think because Tolkien was a Linguist that he wrote it so well. I agree completely. The Return Of The King, in particular, was a complete letdown. I guess I'll have to see the extended editions before I make my final opinion, but aside from The Fellowship Of The Ring, the films at the cinema were appalling. posted by fatpie42 |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
 i hate the films and will never read the books hate the fantasy genre as a whole utter gash the end posted by the anomaly |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote: hate the fantasy genre as a whole Well, as a former doorman...  
posted by knn |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
Now that I have looked at it and seen Annaerullo's feedback for it I am quite worried. You think that was the best set of LOTR movies they could make? Are you crazy? They made a huge balls-up of the set of movies already and the guy on this site wants them to piss all over Tolkein's grave a SECOND time? You're both mad - mad as march hares! posted by fatpie42 |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
The books are overrated. But the movies are even more overrated. posted by hungarian kid |
|||
|
|||
 Register Log in |
The time now is 7 January 2009, 18:00 php B.B. |